P. R. GOKULAKRISHNAN, R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a public interest Litigation by the appellants who are legal practitioners and they are supported by respondents Nos. 4 to 20 who are Labour Unions They are all practising before the Labour Courts in Gujarat They are challenging the transfers of Labour Court Judges by the Government According to them this power of transfer control and superintendence over the labour judiciary is vested in the High Court under Arts 235 and 227 of the Constitution and therefore these transfers of 11 Labour Judge by the impugned order dated 28/06/1984 Annexure A to the petition are without any authority or competence They have also challenged the constitutional validity of Sec. 9 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 under which the State Government has the power to constitute Labour Courts and to appoint persons having qualifications specified in sub-sec. (2) to Sec. 9. The said Section reads as follows9 Labour Court - (1) the State Government shall by notification in the Official Gazette Constitute one or more Labour Courts having jurisdiction in such local areas as may be specified In such notification and shall appoint persons having the qualifications specified in sub-sec. (2) to preside over such Courts (2) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Presiding Officer of a Labour Court unless (a) he has practiced as an advocate or a pleader for not less than three years in the High Court or any Court subordinate thereto or In any Labour Court Industrial Court or Tribunal established in the State under this Act or the Industrial Disputes Act 1547 (XIV of 1947) or any law corresponding to any such act for the time being In force in the State; or (b) he has regularly appeared as a member of a trade union for not less than seven years in proceedings before any such Labour Court Industrial Court or Tribunal and holds a degree in law of a University established by law in any part of India or (c) he holds a degree in law of a University established by law in any Dart of India and has held an office not lower in rank than that of a Registrar of a Labour Court or an Industrial Court or of an Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the State Government for not less than five yearsformerly in place of sub-sec. (2) there was a proviso which has beers repealed by Gujarat Act No. 22 of 1981 which was as under a provided that no person shall be so appointed unless he possessed the qualifications other than the qualification of the laid do in under Art 234 of the Constitution for being eligible to enter the judicial service in the State of Gujarat.

( 2 ) IT is submitted that the independence of Judiciary and separation of judicial powers from the executive Government are fundamental and basic in the scheme of the Constitution and Art 50 gives the Directive Principle of State Policy as under; the State shall take steps to separate the judicialy from the executive in the public service of the State in the appeal following additional ground has been permitted to be raised: the appellants submit that Sec. 9 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 is so far as It empowers the State Government to appoint and transfer Labour Court Judges without following the provisions of Arts 233 234 235 and 236 of the Constitution of India and in violation thereof and without Intervention of the High Court is ultra vires the said articles and is therefore unconstitutional and of no effect. There are some other contentions also which we will mention later on

( 3 ) THE learned single Judge dismissed the petition holding that it is not a correct position that all the quasi judicial authorities and Tribunals are subject to the control of the High Court so much so that the High Court should exercise administrative control in respect of transfer and other matters as it does for the District Courts and other subordinate Courts. Other contentions were also negatived. In the Letters Patent Appeal it is contended that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document